I had some trouble opening up the readings this week – I couldn’t get to learning styles or multiple intelligences... Did anyone else have this problem? I’ll persist anyway, based on what I gained from the tutorial, lecture and some media sources from the links page.
The following rant I tried to make politically correct.. It probably would have been easier to just say ‘this person’s’ name, and I’m not really sure if you or she cares, but my apologies for the beat around the bush wording.
Did anyone else get a bit excited by the debate that came up at the end of our last tutorial? (I’m pretty sure we were all there, but if not: one person voiced their dissatisfaction with the theory of student centred learning, and the idea of negotiation between teachers and students, which sparked a lot of animosity in the classroom). I think it was so brave of this person to be able to voice their opinion, and although my philosophy is far from the idea of a strict, teacher centred ‘learning’ environment, I have decided that this is the type of student I would encourage my pupils to aspire to, as learners in a classroom. As Pete concluded the session, he said that while his ideas were not on a level with this person’s, it is really important that everyone is able to voice their opinion in the classroom. This is truly creating a comfortable learning environment in which all people are equal, valued, and feel allowed to speak their voice! Yeah! We could have spent hours.. years.. analysing this debate.. I was intrigued. I wanted to know this person’s background: Private School? (I think so).. Probably a prefect... I wanted to find out about this person’s cultural and educational background to find out why they thought like this. And just because I don’t think the same way, it doesn’t mean that they are wrong – they just think differently. But (the big BUT)… how will this person survive in and educational environment when there is no space for negotiation? So back to my ideal classroom… I want my students to debate and explore and analyse. I want them to feel confident enough to express their opinions, even when they know that majority of their peers feels differently, because it shows that they have learned how to think critically and objectively. Who cares what’s right or wrong. Is there right and wrong?
This leads me on to Inquiry base learning. The focus on how we know rather than what we know. How do you know something? My answer: by finding out.We could use any one of the many examples presented to us so far;
By using ‘the 5 E’s:
Enage
Explore
Explain
Elaborate
Evaluate.
By understanding and applying Bloom’s Taxonomy:
Remembering
Understanding
Applying
Evaluating
Creating.
Through Inquiry based learning. Hands on learning is so important in helping people to connect ideas to the real world and to each other. Kids need a range of learning experiences aswell. Just going on excursions all the time will not help them to apply their learning to a range of fields. Nor will just learning from a blackboard, or reading from a text book. We need to inspire! Engage! Be flexible for individuals who need different kinds of stimulation. But how do we cater for the needs of 22 individuals 8 hours a day? I think through creating a structured learning environment, within which students can explore freedom. I think that kids need boundaries. I think kids need the freedom to feel that they are not being coerced, but need to know where to draw the line. There’s a school in Britain called Summerhill. It’s based on the philosophy of ‘do as you please, so long as it doesn’t cause harm to others’. Kind of punk educating. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summerhill_School . Check out this link. What do you think? I like the idea, although I’m not sure if I am prepared to practice it. Yet.
Here is another link for a program for students who don’t quite fit into ‘the box’ of education curriculum. The program was founded by a psychologist named Louise Earnshaw, based on her research into similarities between successful entrepreneurs and misunderstood youths. It’s aimed at tertiary students, but I reckon it could be adapted and applied to any level of learning. The link is to an article Louise wrote for Insight, but you can follow it back to The Chutzpah Factory website.
So what do you guys think? Is there right and wrong in a classroom? Or is everybody right so long as they can justify their opinion? And how do we encourage our students to accept the possibility that there so many rights that are different to their own right, yet still have the potential to be right?
Are we forming children who are only capable of learning what we already know, or should we try to develop creative and innovative minds, capable of discovery throughout life? (Piaget)
The following rant I tried to make politically correct.. It probably would have been easier to just say ‘this person’s’ name, and I’m not really sure if you or she cares, but my apologies for the beat around the bush wording.
Did anyone else get a bit excited by the debate that came up at the end of our last tutorial? (I’m pretty sure we were all there, but if not: one person voiced their dissatisfaction with the theory of student centred learning, and the idea of negotiation between teachers and students, which sparked a lot of animosity in the classroom). I think it was so brave of this person to be able to voice their opinion, and although my philosophy is far from the idea of a strict, teacher centred ‘learning’ environment, I have decided that this is the type of student I would encourage my pupils to aspire to, as learners in a classroom. As Pete concluded the session, he said that while his ideas were not on a level with this person’s, it is really important that everyone is able to voice their opinion in the classroom. This is truly creating a comfortable learning environment in which all people are equal, valued, and feel allowed to speak their voice! Yeah! We could have spent hours.. years.. analysing this debate.. I was intrigued. I wanted to know this person’s background: Private School? (I think so).. Probably a prefect... I wanted to find out about this person’s cultural and educational background to find out why they thought like this. And just because I don’t think the same way, it doesn’t mean that they are wrong – they just think differently. But (the big BUT)… how will this person survive in and educational environment when there is no space for negotiation? So back to my ideal classroom… I want my students to debate and explore and analyse. I want them to feel confident enough to express their opinions, even when they know that majority of their peers feels differently, because it shows that they have learned how to think critically and objectively. Who cares what’s right or wrong. Is there right and wrong?
This leads me on to Inquiry base learning. The focus on how we know rather than what we know. How do you know something? My answer: by finding out. We could use any one of the many examples presented to us so far;
By using ‘the 5 E’s:
Enage
Explore
Explain
Elaborate
Evaluate.
By understanding and applying Bloom’s Taxonomy:
Remembering
Understanding
Applying
Evaluating
Creating.
Through Inquiry based learning. Hands on learning is so important in helping people to connect ideas to the real world and to each other. Kids need a range of learning experiences aswell. Just going on excursions all the time will not help them to apply their learning to a range of fields. Nor will just learning from a blackboard, or reading from a text book. We need to inspire! Engage! Be flexible for individuals who need different kinds of stimulation. But how do we cater for the needs of 22 individuals 8 hours a day? I think through creating a structured learning environment, within which students can explore freedom. I think that kids need boundaries. I think kids need the freedom to feel that they are not being coerced, but need to know where to draw the line. There’s a school in Britain called Summerhill. It’s based on the philosophy of ‘do as you please, so long as it doesn’t cause harm to others’. Kind of punk educating. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summerhill_School . Check out this link. What do you think? I like the idea, although I’m not sure if I am prepared to practice it. Yet.
Here is another link for a program for students who don’t quite fit into ‘the box’ of education curriculum. The program was founded by a psychologist named Louise Earnshaw, based on her research into similarities between successful entrepreneurs and misunderstood youths. It’s aimed at tertiary students, but I reckon it could be adapted and applied to any level of learning. The link is to an article Louise wrote for Insight, but you can follow it back to The Chutzpah Factory website.
http://www.chutzpahfactory.edu.au/window.php?image=/_images/chutzpahmedia/EmpoweringYouth.gif
So what do you guys think? Is there right and wrong in a classroom? Or is everybody right so long as they can justify their opinion? And how do we encourage our students to accept the possibility that there so many rights that are different to their own right, yet still have the potential to be right?
Are we forming children who are only capable of learning what we already know, or should we try to develop creative and innovative minds, capable of discovery throughout life? (Piaget)